Things I didn’t learn in ITIL school

4902440868_5f916ccdb6_zWhile at the Pink Elephant Conference back in February, I successfully completed an ITIL intermediate class/exam and the really cool part of this is, that I’ve been able to use the knowledge gained in the course to change my company’s adoption plan and help streamline our strategy.

I was discussing this sequence of events and outcomes with colleagues. Our conversation kept circling back to the things we have to do in ITSM to help drive adoption and how many of those things that are not covered in ITIL courses. I have jotted them down here to help you in your planning, as these items can be the “sticking” points that disrupt and delay ITSM activities.

Sales/Selling

In any ITSM plan you need to have a sales strategy and sales plan. You are bringing concepts and ideas that may be seen as “threats” to the way your colleagues currently conduct business. You will need to be able to convey your message to senior/executive management, line staff, mid-level management, and customers.

You will not find much in the ITIL books that explain how to sell a new idea/change to your business. You will need to master this skill on your own and you will need to spend time outside of work perfecting it.

One other point to mention is that people sometimes swap the terms “sales” and “marketing” in similar context. Personally I do not think they are the same thing. Sales plans are designed to help decision makers “buy” your ideas/concepts. Marketing plans are designed to help teams adopt decisions. Of course, there is overlap in the definitions though. I encourage you to gain insight in to how your organization views these terms and plan accordingly.

Takeaways:

  • Have a “sales” plan for each ITSM item
  • Read books on selling or discuss with professionals who sell things for a living

Negotiation

You and your team will have wonderful ideas. While we know you have the organizations best interests at heart, not everyone may see your proposals as progress. You will need negotiation skills to help settle difference in opinions and reach the best possible outcome. You will need to assess attitudes, understand what knowledge is available, and draw on interpersonal skills to obtain a win-win situation.

Mastering this skill will not only benefit you in an ITSM role but may also help you be seen as a better candidate for future positions.

Takeaways:

  • Take courses on formal and informal negotiation techniques
  • Build a relationship/mentorship with a person who negotiates for a living. Practice negotiating with this person

Building Relationships

Of all the potential pitfalls you may encounter, building relationships can be the showstopper. This skill is necessary regardless of the work you do. You MUST learn to network and build relationships with people throughout your company/organization.

Think of it this way; a person’s decision whether to help you may depend on how you make them feel, how much they trust you, and their perception of how willing you are to work with them. Building good solid relationships with everyone who will execute your ITSM vision is critical for success.

Yes, it will be a lot of hard work. You will need to prove you put their needs before yours, be prepared to give consistently and receive occasionally, value the message and the messenger, and be willing to see the other person’s view without bias. You do not necessarily need to have deep, meaningful contact with everyone but you do need to have the ability to allow others to perceive they can be comfortable around you.

Takeaways:

  • Try to meet someone new in your company every day. Once you have met everyone in your company branch out to your community
  • Make notes on family, hobbies, likes, etc., on your contacts. Review these notes prior to meeting with the person
  • Use social media to meet people from around the globe
  • Do not force this – build relationships at the other person’s pace

The value equation

In ITSM, we spend a great deal of time discussing the value of a service. We discuss the importance to the business of showing value in the services we offer, we discuss the pitfalls off not showing value, and we discuss the criteria and mechanics of how to show value. Do we discuss how to show the value of ITSM adoption?

The CIO has made an investment in the IT department by deciding to adopt ITSM. The CIO most likely had to get someone above his/her role to agree this was a good idea as well. Regardless of stated requirements for your role, the CIO expects you to demonstrate value. You will need to show the ROI of an improved process, the TCO of service activities, how efficiently it has provided more resource capacity, how teams are now utilizing the additional resource capacity, and how the ITSM program is fit for purpose & fit for use.

Takeaways:

  • Understand how to calculate ROI and TCO and how your company interprets this information.
  • Be able to show the utility and warranty of your ITSM work.
  • Hold regularly scheduled reviews with senior leadership on ITSM value.

Final Thoughts

I learned about most of these items the hard way. Most (if not all) the things listed here are (possibly unstated) expectations of you. Remember:

  • Focus on building relationships. Good relationships will take you far in your journey.
  • While you need to be in charge of the sales plan, you do not have to be the chief seller. If others in your company are good at selling, enlist their help.
  • Make sure you understand what information/reports your boss and the CIO want/need regarding the value of the ITSM program
  • Do not get overwhelmed if you cannot quickly master these skills. These skills take time to learn and internalize. Remember this is an iterative process and little improvements on each interaction are good.
  • Do not forget to record your accomplishments somewhere. You’ll need them for your value calculations and discussion.
  •  Do not forget to enjoy what you do and have fun. You can quickly succumb to the negatives in ITSM work. At the end of the day, especially the tough days, ask if you helped make your company better. If the answer is no, regroup and try again tomorrow. If the answer is yes, pat yourself on the back move onto the next goal.

Image Credit

Customers are not your top priority

TrainsThere is this myth that IT (or any service provider) should be utterly focused on customers; that a customer obsession is the secret sauce to IT success; and that unhappy customers mean we in service have failed.

Railroads don’t bear this out.

Railroads in the USA have fought tooth and nail with their customer base for decades.  After the Second World War, freight customers decided the railroads were screwing them. Government legislation progressively regulated and price-controlled the railroads into the ground, until the whole system was on the verge of collapse.  Only de-regulation with the Staggers Act in 1980 freed the railroads to operate economically again and put them back on track (sorry) to their currently-thriving state.

And now the customers are complaining about freight rates again…

Meeting the needs of the business

If railroads were customer-obsessed – as the modern fad would have it – then they would provide all sorts of specialised rolling stock tailored to their customers needs / wants.

It certainly didn’t start out that way.

Originally a customer could hire a boxcar, reefer (refrigerated boxcar), flatcar, gondola, hopper, or tankcar.  That was pretty much the choice: not tailored to the customer, just a choice of a few basic shapes. Was a hopper car or boxcar shaped that way because the customers wanted it?  No, they were that way because they worked best internally for the functioning of the railroad. All sorts of loads fit uncomfortably in gondolas or boxcars, but that is what the customer got regardless of any complaints. Automobiles were chained on flatcars and car parts struggled in and out of boxcars for decades before the specialised rolling stock came along.

As the 20th Century progressed, railroads built special rolling stock to meet customer needs: automobile carriers, the aircraft body-parts carriers, trailer trains.  But you still couldn’t really say they were customer-focused.

The trailer train is a case in point: the Santa Fe railroad worked closely with the Hunt trucking empire to develop “intermodal” rolling stock to meet a customer need: to transport truck-trailers cross-country on special flatcars.  But the trailer train design was about moving truck-shaped loads on a railroad, not making trucking easy.  They still needed to drive the trailers carefully onto the flatcars and chain them down (and eventually they craned the whole thing on!).

When railroads introduced covers for coal hoppers, it wasn’t about looking after the customer’s coal – it was because coal dust was destroying the rail ballast.  Until then the railroads were perfectly happy to have a percentage of the load blow away and the rest get wet and icy.

In recent years, railroads have realised the best profits are in large volumes of single loads in dedicated unit trains, instead of mixed freight, and as our societies have become bigger and more industrialised warranting those unit trains, specialised rolling stock has become more common: for coal, ethanol, automobiles, logs, and of course containers.

But in general, railroads have always built general-purpose rolling stock that best suited their purposes not the customers.  Customers had to make do, with some highly profitable exceptions.

Finally, the container took the customers challenge away by introducing a standardised unit of shipping and now both parties are (generally) happy, but that didn’t stem from any railroad initiative to please the customer.

Customers are the source of revenue not the masters of the business

Railroads spend billions on infrastructure development every year (most of which is not driven by customer).  A railroad will occasionally run a rail line up to a big customer, but most of the time lines are laid for geography first and being close to economic density second.  Individual customers need to (re)locate close to the railroad or arrange local freight.  If a customer wants a branch built up to their coal mine, power plant, or factory, they usually have to build it at their own expense.

Railways are as quick to cut services as to provide them, depending on their own interests.  Governments have to legislate to force railways to run passenger services, and have done so for half a century in most countries.

The fact is, railroads are focused on moving stuff as efficiently, economically and reliably as they can, with enough surplus to keep up the massive infrastructure investments, for maximum profit.  The customer is only there to pay for it all.

Airlines are the same.  While a few airlines like Emirates differentiate themselves by chasing the customer who wants to be cared for, most airlines today clearly regard economy passengers as “self-loading freight”.  Emirates has long been accused of all sorts of unfair government support; they burn petro-dollars as a PR flagship for a “progressive” Dubai.  Most airlines (and their governments) can’t afford those levels of service anymore and instead simply stay competitive.

Telcos are a third example, with telco customer support being legendarily bad (although New Zealand Telecom have made leaps and bounds to improve).

Customer service level is a business decision

What do all these industries have in common?  They are commodities, in a race to zero on price.

You can rave all you want about Apple or Zappos.  These are companies who have chosen to differentiate themselves on service quality.  That is a conscious decision on their part, and certainly in Apple’s case they charge like a wounded bull to pay for it (and scam on paying taxes in your country too, unless you live in Luxembourg, but that is another article).  I don’t see Google, Amazon, Samsung, Microsoft, or HTC going broke, despite the fact their support sucks.

The level of love and attention you give your customers is a business decision.  It is a dial an organisation sets from “scum” to “master” depending on the strategy and current state of the business.

The governors of your organisation make the decision as to how important customers are, hopefully for good business reasons. The executive managers decide how that translates into levels of customer care, and that translates into service policy.  It is not for any of us to decide otherwise.  If you over-service the customer you are wasting money and putting the future viability of the organisation at risk.  This is true whether you work for a commercial business, a not-for-profit, or public service.

New Zealand Telecom lifted its game because its service had become so utterly awful as a monopoly that the government decided to deregulate and break Telecom up.  They had nowhere else to go: they were universally hated and they were too bloated to compete on price or agility.  Their competitors continue with the staggeringly bad support because they know it doesn’t cost them much business (see my case study about bad customer service).

Railroads are the same.  They know they need to deliver reliably and they know they need to listen to customer’s needs.  Some of the small railroads even specialise in customer service.  But in the main it is all about cutting a hard-nosed deal on price.

Don’t get confused…

Don’t confuse listening to needs with customer love. Any canny organisation follows its market: that is pure self-interest.  Railroads built specialised automotive rolling stock only after decades of complaints about dents and dust.

Don’t confuse good service availability with customer love. The only thing customers want from railroads, airlines, and telcos is that they work reliably.  We bitch about their rudeness and uncaring attitudes but we don’t switch because in the end it all comes down to price (or lack of options).

So don’t be led astray by vendors, analysts, pundits or consultants who tell you to spend more on customer care; and don’t let anyone tell you that you are failing in your job if your customers aren’t inviting you to barbeques at home.

Our job is to meet the goals of our organisation and to protect its ongoing viability.  We do as much for our customers as we need to, as we are instructed to, in order to achieve those goals.

Image credit

Rob England: What is a Service Catalogue?

"The menu analogies we see all the time when talking about service catalogue are misleading. "
"The menu analogies we see all the time when talking about service catalogue are misleading. "

We are looking at railways (railroads) as a useful case study for talking about service management.

What is the service catalogue of a railway?

If you said the timetable then I beg to differ.  If you said one-trip, return and monthly tickets I don’t agree either.

The menu analogies we see all the time when talking about service catalogue are misleading.

A menu (or timetable) represents the retail consumer case: where the customer and the user are one.  In many scenarios we deal with in business, the one paying is not the one consuming.

The service catalogue describes what the customer can buy.  The request catalogue is what the user can request.  Consider a railroad cook-wagon feeding a track crew out in the wilds: the cook decides with the railroad what to serve; the staff get a choice of two dishes.

The cook’s services are:

  • Buying and delivering and storing ingredients
  • Mobile cooking and eating facilities
  • Cooking food
  • Serving food onsite

That is the service catalogue.  The railway can choose to buy some or all of those services from the caterer, or to go elsewhere for some of them.

The menu is a service package option to the “cooking food” service.  The railroad chooses the options based on cost and staff morale.  The menu gives staff the illusion of choice.

First and foremost, a service catalogue describes what a service provider does. How often and what flavour are only options to a service or package of services.  A railway’s service catalogue is some or all of:

  • Container transport
  • Bulk goods transport (especially coal, stone and ore)
  • Less-than-container-load (parcel) transport
  • Priority and perishables transport (customers don’t send fruit as regular containers or parcels: they need it cold and fast)
  • Door-to-door (trucks for the “last mile”)
  • Dangerous goods transport (the ethanol delusion generates huge revenues for US railroads)
  • Large loads transport (anything oversize or super heavy: huge vehicles, transformers, tanks…)
  • Livestock transport
  • Rolling-stock transport (railways get paid to deliver empty wagons back their owners)
  • Finance (a railway can provide credit services to customers)
  • Ancillary freight services: customs clearance, shipping, security…
  • Passenger transport
  • Luggage
  • Lost luggage
  • Bicycles
  • Pet transport
  • Food and drink services (onboard and in stations)
  • Accommodation (big Indian stations all have dormitories and rooms)
  • Tours and entertainment (party trips, scenic trips, winery trips…)
  • Land cruises (just like a cruise ship but on rails)
  • Travel agency
  • Bulk goods storage (railroads charge companies to hold bulk materials in wagons for them awaiting demand: they provide a buffering service)
  • Rolling stock storage (in the USA railroads make money storing surplus freight wagons for other railroads)
  • Rolling stock repair (railways repair private equipment for the owners)
  • Private carriage transport (in many countries you can own your own railroad carriage and have the railway carry you around; a fantasy of mine)
  • Property rental (many large railways are significant landlords)
  • Land sales

Where’s the timetable or ticket pricing now?  It has such a small part in the true scope of a railway’s services as to be trivial.  More to the point, it is not a service: tickets are request options associated with one of many services.  Users don’t request a service: “I’d like an email please”. No, they make a request for an option associated with a service: provision email, increase mailbox, delete account, retrieve deleted email etc…

People confuse their personal consumer experience with business: they try to apply consumer experience models to business processing.  Most customers don’t want a service catalogue “to look like Amazon”.  They want meaningful business information.  The best vehicle for that is usually a text document.  The users/consumers of a service(s) may want to see the requests associated with that service(s) in an Amazon-like interface.  Sometimes there may even be a valid business case for building them a groovy automated request catalogue, but it is not the service catalogue.

The service catalogue defines what we do.  It is not simply an ordering mechanism for customers.  That is that personal/business thing again.  A service catalogue has multiple functions.

  1. Yes it is a brochure for customers to choose from.
  2. It also provides a structure to frame what we do as a service provider: availability planning, incident reporting, server grouping… Once we have a catalogue we find ourselves bring it up in diverse contexts: “we see the list of services show up in the table of contents”.
  3. It is a reference to compare against when debating a decision
  4. It is a benchmark to compare against when reporting (especially the service levels, but not only the service levels)
  5. It becomes a touchstone, a rallying point, an icon, a banner to follow.  It brings people back to why we are here and what we are for as an organisation.

You don’t get that from Amazon.

Then we come to that endless source of confusion and debate: technical service catalogue.  That deserves a whole discussion of its own, so we will look at it next…

SERVICE DESK 2.0 -The Service Desk is dead…long live the Service Desk!

Service Desk 2.0
Service Desk 2.0: More about services, products and capabilities, less about incidents and fixes.

We all know the world of IT is developing at a frightening pace.

Has Service Management been left in the dust?

I recently corresponded with Aale Roos,  ITSM Consultant and founder at Pohjoisviitta Oy, who argues that the old perception of the Service Desk has to be replaced with a new way of thinking.

Q. The ITSM Review: Aale, could you tell me a bit about yourself ?

In 1989 I left my job at a Computercenter to become an ITSM consultant (We called it Data Processing Management Consulting back then, the company was called DPMC Oy)

In 1992 I started Help Desk Institute in Finland. By 2002 I was completely bored with help desks but saw that ITIL was coming and went into ITIL training and consulting.

Then in 2007 I thought that ITIL V3 was a big mistake and concentrated in ISO 20,000 instead.

Today I see a renewed interest in support but I think that ITIL is way behind. People don’t want to hear the same old stuff.

Q. What led to your Service Desk 2.0 Concept?

There are three major reasons why the good old Service Desk model is fast becoming obsolete:

1. Users Got IT Savvy

The concept of a Single Point Of Contact (SPOC) was a great innovation. Instead of having several numbers like PC support, operators, telecommunications etc. to call, the IT end users were given one single number and a promise that they would get help. The model was a great success; it was a major improvement to the previous situation, both for IT and the users of IT services.

There is nothing wrong with the SPOC model itself, it works fine if there is a fairly homogenous group of customers who have the same problems. This happens when people are confronting something complicated which is new to them and the 20/80 rule works; if you can solve 20% of issues, you can solve 80% of end user calls. That was the situation with IT before year 2000. It was new and complicated and people had repeating problems that were relatively easy to solve.

Today almost everyone is used to IT and can solve simple problems themselves. People are not afraid of computers like they were in the 1980’s when this model was invented.  There is no homogenous group of users with easy problems, users are different and their problems and needs are more specific.

2. Diversity vs. Standardization

The second major change is the technology. There have been two major waves of computing and a third is emerging: first the central computing with mainframes, then the personal computing with PC’s and now the consumer computing with iPads, Apps and Cloud. One of the key concepts in ITSM is standardization. Support and maintenance is much easier if users have standard equipment. BYOD is an anathema to this but is becoming reality. People use the tools they want to use and now consumer products are overtaking corporate IT. It is hard to support something you do not know.

3. Paradigm Shift in Support

The third change is the real game breaker. The whole Service Desk / incident/ problem -thinking is based on the assumption that technology malfunctions but is easy to fix. There must be one person per x hundreds of users. This model would not work with consumer services where one person can support a million users. FaceBook has 845.000.000 users and 3.000 staff. I would be surprised if more than 845 of them would be doing support, probably less. WordPress has 20 million customers and 10 happiness Engineers to support them.

The only way to support millions of users with one person is to make products and services robust, reliable and easy to use and that is exactly what has happened.

Aale Roos

Q. What does Service Desk 2.0 mean in practice?

Do we still need a service desk then? Yes we do but it has to change. The old ITIL Service Desk is like the old Service station including as garage. Handy if your car broke down. The new service station does not fix cars but sells food. Handy if you are hungry.

The new Service Desk 2.0 is like the Applestore. It is not about incidents and fixes, it is about services and products. Or maybe it is really about capabilities, Service desk 2.0 strives to give you better tools.

The new model plays down the SPOC model. Yes, there is a number but it is ok to contact the expert direct. They key is service, not incidents. Self service and peer support are important. SD2 is the place for new solutions. Feedback is also important, SD2 listens to the customers and drives service improvements.

Q. There seems to be increased interest in Service Catalogue – in this the answer to swapping the focus from call volumes to services and perceived value?

Yes, exactly.

Q. What key steps would you recommend for embracing the requirements of the modern day service desk?

  1. Learn to use new tools and keep up with you front runner customers.
  2. Be active in sharing new solutions.
  3. Be visible in social media
  4. Understand that peer to peer support happens

Aale Roos is an ITSM Consultant and founder at Pohjoisviitta Oy.

See also:

Rob England: "What is Service Management?"

Tenuous link: One of Rob's passions outside of ITSM is trains. The ITSM Review offices are in sunny Swindon in the UK, home of Isambard Kingdom Brunel's workshops which powered the Great Western Railway.

Editor’s Note: We are very pleased to welcome Rob England (a.k.a The IT Skeptic) as regular columnist at The ITSM Review.

Service Management

Railways provide a useful analogy for understanding what service management is and how it works.

What is a railway for? (or “railroad” for our American readers)

If you said “to move people and/or goods” you are only partly right.  On the right track (pun intended) but not there yet.

How should it move goods and passengers?  With maximum quality?  Or at minimum cost?  The answer to that is “it depends”.  It depends on what the customer wants.

A customer is one who pays for the service of the railway.  That isn’t always the same as the one who buys the ticket or books the freight.  Many railways receive public funding, so the government or other body is effectively also a customer: they are paying for part of the service.  Not all customers are users of the services.

The railway is answerable not only to its customers.  It is also answerable to its owners and the governors they delegate authority to.  The owners may not want the same things as the customers at all.  For example, railways are often required to provide a passenger service as a requirement of gaining the right to operate.  These passenger services are often unprofitable: the money is in the freight services.  Guess how often such passenger services meet the needs of the paying ticket-holders.

So a railway exists to provide a service that moves people and/or goods to meet the needs of its governors and customers.

Your are in the service business

If you were operating a railway, what activities would you have to manage in order to ensure you meet the needs of your governors and customers?  There would be some activities that are unique to railways, such as scheduling, servicing rolling stock, dispatching trains and so on.  But the bulk of the activities involved in operating a railway are the same as operating any business: reporting, financials, HR, marketing, IT, procurement… and delivering your services.  It doesn’t matter whether an organisation’s services are transporting goods, providing accommodation, building houses or catching fish.  They all serve customers and they all perform a similar set of activities to manage that service.

Whether you build roads or map them, operate ports or use them, build houses or sell them, plan weddings or sing at them, care for kids or clothe them, sell PCs or scrap them, you are in a service business, even if you may not be in a “service industry”.

We aren’t talking about over-the-counter “may I help you?” service, how to develop the customer service interface, the experience of contact.  Service Management is about the end-to-end process of providing services.  It covers such things as:

Service management activities Rail examples
Delivering Executing a service for users Food service, engine drivers, shunters
Operating running the infrastructure that makes the services work Signaling, track maintenance, security guards
Supporting Responding to user requests for service or help, and resolving them Ticket sales, call centre, guard, repair crews
Cataloguing Providing information about what services are available Timetables, websites, brochures
Customer relations Maintaining relationships with customers Customer account managers, sales, public relations
Measuring Monitoring and reporting service metrics Punctuality, traffic volumes, profitability
Planning Proposing, choosing and strategising new services, improvements and retirements Routes, trains, schedules, freight deals, specialised cars e.g. refrigerated)
Designing How the service will work, what infrastructure it needs Developing  anew schedule, specifying new equipment
Building Creating the infrastructure, mechanisms, and processes to deliver a service Ordering or constructing new rolling stock, laying track, hiring and training staff, printing collateral
Implementing Rolling out the new service, going “live” Commissioning new rolling stock, publishing new or changed schedules, deploying staff, rolling trains
Assuring Protecting the organisation, its staff, customers and users.  Making sure the service is safe for people, compliance and profits. Track safety programmes, risk register, ticket inspection, financial and quality audits
Improving Making service better: identifying, planning and managing improvement to efficiency and effectiveness Quality programme, cost control, regular maintenance schedules
Governing Direct, monitor and evaluate the management and execution of the services Corporate vision and goals, high-level policy, risk profile, annual report

Service Management says the most important thing you do is deliver services to your customers.  Moreover, everything you do should be considered in terms of the services you provide to your customers.

‘Outside-In’ Thinking

Adopting a service management approach can have a profound affect on the way your business works and your staff think.  It takes us away from that introverted, bottom-up thinking that begins with what we have and what we do and eventually works its way up and out to what we deliver to the customer.  Instead, with service management we change our point of view from concentrating on the internal “plumbing” of our business, moving instead to a focus on what “comes out of the pipe” – what we provide.  We take an “outside-in” view.  Starting from this external perspective we then work our way top-down into the service organisation to derive what we need and what we have to do in order to provide that service.

Service management isn’t one subset of the business; it is not one activity at the end of the main supply chain.  It is a different way of seeing the whole supply chain, the whole business that produces the services, by seeing it initially from the outside, from the customer’s point of view.  Therefore any discussion of Service Management may stray into general business management topics.

Seeing our business in terms of the services it provides can’t help but make us better at providing them.

To a customer, “better” means more useful and more reliable, i.e. more valuable and better quality.  

From the service-provider’s point of view, “better” means more effective and more efficient, i.e. better results and cheaper.  

Follow along in this series of articles as we look at Service Management through the lens of railways and how they operate.  We hope it will provide a fun and useful way to understand this thing called Service Management.

© Copyright 2012 Two Hills Ltd.

'Basic Service Management' by Rob England (a.k.a The IT Skeptic)

Basic Service Management by Rob England

This is a quick review of Rob England’s book ‘Basic Service Management’.

You can find out more about Rob’s book and the TIPU method here: www.basicsm.com. If you want to share your own review please add a comment below.

In my opinion this is a well written introduction to service management.

This book might have also been called:

  • ‘Service Management in a nutshell’
  • ‘An introduction to Service Management’
  • ‘Service Management for Business Owners’
  • ‘The book on Service Management that you buy for your boss’ or
  • ‘How to introduce someone to service management without scaring the bejesus out of them by banging on about ITIL or other IT geekery’

I read this in one sitting and I’m not a fast reader. It is quick, accessible and thought provoking.

It is not an ITSM or IT book per se, in fact I think the best recipient of this book is a non-IT business owner or service owner who wants to appreciate the benefits of service management.

As an ITSM professional, this is the sort of book you need to send to those you wish to educate and influence about your chosen profession. Or as one Amazon reviewer put it: “I recommend reading it before you get lost in ITIL”. This would also be useful to an entrepreneur looking to start or scale their business.

Why Service Management?

“If you are reading this book, you probably don’t manage your services so much. That gives you an opportunity to increase revenues and profitability: improving your service brings increased efficiency and effectiveness. That means increased returns for much less investment than from improving your products or equipment”.

Rob England, The IT Skeptic

Rob is a great wordsmith and well respected in the ITSM industry – my only criticism of this book is that I wish he had used the power of metaphor, story telling or examples to describe his seven practice areas. The second half of the book tends to slide into a glossary of his basic service management terms and bullet points. I thought this might have been a perfect opportunity for Rob to use some examples in order to reinforce his message and walk the reader through his ‘Seven Areas’ rather than explaining principles in purely theoretical terms.

In the ‘How to Use this Book’ section Rob urges the reader to “Read it, It is short”. In a similar fashion my advice to you as an ITSM professional is, “Buy it, it is good”.

Have you read Rob’s book? Please share your opinion in the comments below.

Links: